MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3120063984 · doi:10.1073/pnas.2026053118

A Bayesian neural network predicts the dissolution of compact planetary systems

2021· preprint· en· W3120063984 on OpenAlexaff
Miles Cranmer, Daniel Tamayo, Hanno Rein, Peter Battaglia, Sam Hadden, Philip J. Armitage, Shirley Ho, David N. Spergel

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial neural networkAlgorithmEstimatorInstabilityArtificial intelligenceBayesian probabilityIntegratorGeneralizationMachine learningPhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce a Bayesian neural network model that can accurately predict not only if, but also when a compact planetary system with three or more planets will go unstable. Our model, trained directly from short N-body time series of raw orbital elements, is more than two orders of magnitude more accurate at predicting instability times than analytical estimators, while also reducing the bias of existing machine learning algorithms by nearly a factor of three. Despite being trained on compact resonant and near-resonant three-planet configurations, the model demonstrates robust generalization to both nonresonant and higher multiplicity configurations, in the latter case outperforming models fit to that specific set of integrations. The model computes instability estimates up to [Formula: see text] times faster than a numerical integrator, and unlike previous efforts provides confidence intervals on its predictions. Our inference model is publicly available in the SPOCK (https://github.com/dtamayo/spock) package, with training code open sourced (https://github.com/MilesCranmer/bnn_chaos_model).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences→Same topicStellar, planetary, and galactic studies→French-language works237,207→